Views
5 years ago

Blacksburg, Virginia - Virginia Tech

Blacksburg, Virginia - Virginia Tech

from what we reported.

from what we reported. In our study, overall, crude protein levels peaked at the 90 kg N ha -1 and show no increase beyond this rate. ADF The interaction between N rate x N source was significant for some of the harvests, therefore interaction means will be presented (Table 3-5). At the Blacksburg location in 2009, the effect of N source on ADF was observed. The first harvest showed no response to N rate whereas the second harvest showed effect of N at the 135 kg N ha -1 rate. The ADF value ranged from 330-440 g kg -1 across N rates and sources for the first harvest in 2009 while the range was higher for the second harvest at 430 to 480 g kg -1 (Table 3-5). ADF values, in general, were lower in 2010 than 2009. In 2010, N source effect on ADF was observed for the second but not the first harvest. The first harvest of 2010 showed a difference between N rates 0 and 135 kg N ha -1 whereas the second harvest showed no response. The ADF values across N rates and sources ranged from 280 - 340 and 270-320 g kg -1 for the first and the second harvest, respectively. Similar to the Blacksburg location, at the Southern Piedmont location in both 2009 and 2010, effect of N rates and N sources on ADF varied across harvest dates. No response to N source was observed for the first and second harvests in 2009, unlike the third harvest. The first harvest showed no response to N rate over the 45 kg N ha -1 rate while no response to N rate was observed the second harvest. The third harvest at the Blackstone location in 2009 showed a response between 0 and 135 kg N ha -1 rates. This was similar to the first harvest of 2010 at the Blacksburg location. In 2009, the ADF values from the second harvest were the highest, followed by the first harvest and then the third. The range of ADF values for the first, second, and third harvest were 380 to 43

410 g kg -1 , 400 to 430 g kg -1 , and 340 to 400 g kg -1 , respectively. Similar to harvests one and two of 2009, no response to N source was observed in 2010. Both harvests of 2010 showed different responses between the 45 and the 135 kg N ha -1 rates. The ADF values from 2010 ranged from 290 to 350 g kg -1 and 370 to 410 g kg -1 for the first and second harvest, respectively. The range ADF values were higher in 2009 compared with 2010. At the Shenandoah Valley location in 2009, no responses to N sources were observed (Table 3-5). Harvests one and four showed no response to N rates, whereas harvest two showed a response at the 135 kg N ha -1 rate. For harvest three, the only difference in responses to N rates were observed between 45 versus 135 kg N ha -1 rates and between 90 versus 135 kg N ha -1 rates. In 2009, ADF values ranged from 320 to 430 g kg -1 , 360 to 440 g kg -1 , 340 to 400 g kg -1 , and 390 to 450 g kg -1 for the first, second, third and fourth harvests, respectively. In 2010, similar to 2009, differences in ADF due to treatments varied across harvest dates. No differences in response to N source were reported in 2010 with the first harvest being the exception. The first, second and third harvests showed no response to N rate, whereas harvest four showed differences between rates. The ADF values ranged from harvest one ranged from 320 to 390, 300 to 380, 310 to 370, and 320 to 370 g kg -1 for the first, second, third, and fourth harvests, respectively. Overall, there was very little effect of N rate on ADF values. Mixed responses were observed for N sources. In general, ADF values increased with the harvest dates. The ADF values ranged from 271 to 483 g kg -1 , with an average ADF value of 374 g kg -1 . These results are similar to those found in Oregon (Norberg, 2009) and New York (Hunter, 2008) where increases in ADF values were observed with subsequent harvests. Ball et al, 2002, under quality standard for legume, grass, or grass-legume hay listed ADF 44

Articles - Digital Library and Archives - Virginia Tech
The ALAN Review - Digital Library and Archives - Virginia Tech
Volume 2, Issue 3 - Institute for Policy and Governance - Virginia Tech
New Faculty - ACIS | Pamplin - Virginia Tech
Faculty Expertise Guide - College of Engineering - Virginia Tech
PDF (3 MB) - Virginia Cooperative Extension - Virginia Tech
guidelines for - Digital Library and Archives - Virginia Tech
The Research Enterprise at Virginia Tech
CESA in Switzerland - Virginia Tech
Tech Report - University of Virginia
PDF - 3.3MB - Virginia Tech
Research Articles - VTechWorks - Virginia Tech
Brochure - Macromolecules and Interfaces Institute - Virginia Tech
SWATH AGOR Team - Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech Visitor Center - Schellhammer
Heterotic swampland - Physics - Virginia Tech
Homestead Highlights - Reynolds Homestead - Virginia Tech
Mass Shootings at Virginia Tech
June 1, 2011 - Northern Virginia Center - Virginia Tech
September 1, 2011 - Northern Virginia Center - Virginia Tech
CULPEPEr SENIor BULL SALE - Virginia BCIA! - Virginia Tech
Why we have earthquakes in Virginia - Virginia Tech Geothermal Data
NVC NEWS NOW - Northern Virginia Center - Virginia Tech
Nuclear Science & Engineering @ Virginia Tech @ g - Physics ...
Quantization of Fayet-Iliopoulos parameters in ... - Virginia Tech